supra_aero Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Glass of DP at Smollensky's as usual The bonus culture captures the best talent from the best Universities, you need this talent to make your company the most competitive and like all of us, money talks It will not change it just wont be as "visual" this year or going forward for a while Agree - until the xmas parties in the city come November/December Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooquicktostop Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Agree - until the xmas parties in the city come November/December xmas parties, what xmas parties Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 They need to find a way to separate banks that hold our wages / pensions etc from the banks that need to be risky in order to max their investments; else you will have everyone taking silly risks with everybody's money which is exactly what happened. To say that bankers and the banks were not aware of what was going on is just BS. The sub-prime for one was pointed out 4-5 yrs ago... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 The banks that have had public money fired into them shouldn't be rewarding so lavishly this year, or next. But most of that £6bn is either contractually binding (for which the bankers can and will sue for), or it's being paid by banks who have paid back their bail-out money, if they had any in the first place. Saying "banks should pay less" is just attacking the end symptoms. Any one bank that reduces their bonuses will lose a lot of the talent that works for them. If anything, the root causes should be addressed (high fees that the banks charge their clients). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 To say that bankers and the banks were not aware of what was going on is just BS. I had no idea the crisis was going to happen imi. lol On a serious note, its not that none of the bankers knew, its just it was not necessarily in our area or remit to say it. I can't say too much anyway as at work. Imagine you work for Toyota, and see early pics of the LFA - you believe it looks terrible at the back and its a disaster waiting to happen. You work in the service department in a dealership in Surrey. You can call up the head designer at Toyota all you want and tell them you prefer the supra rear lights - you plead with them to change the rear lights. You claim it will cripple Toyota if this car is released with these lights. Do you think they'll listen to a man in the service department of a delearship with no experience in car design? Same thing happens in a bank. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooquicktostop Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 They need to find a way to separate banks that hold our wages / pensions etc from the banks that need to be risky in order to max their investments; else you will have everyone taking silly risks with everybody's money which is exactly what happened. To say that bankers and the banks were not aware of what was going on is just BS. The sub-prime for one was pointed out 4-5 yrs ago... Impossible The money in banks does not stay in one place, it is used to leverage other deals, buy other banks books and invest I did not hear too many people complaining over the boom years about cheap mortgages, booming housing market and cheap loans, the individuals who over streched themselves should look inward for some of the blame, in fact the story would be far far FAR worse should/ when the interest rate climbs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Impossible The money in banks does not stay in one place, it is used to leverage other deals, buy other banks books and invest I did not hear too many people complaining over the boom years about cheap mortgages, booming housing market and cheap loans, the individuals who over streched themselves should look inward for some of the blame, in fact the story would be far far FAR worse should/ when the interest rate climbs And that as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTRickeh Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Your comments are so refreshing supra aero. Few people seem to have a logical approach to this with most regurgitating whatever banker bashing they've seen most recently in the news. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Your comments are so refreshing supra aero. Few people seem to have a logical approach to this with most regurgitating whatever banker bashing they've seen most recently in the news. Agreed. A colleague of mine left to go and work in investment banking in the city. He's probably on top dollar now but I am more than sure he works very hard and long hours. I could have tried to get into it all but it was a decision I ended up making and decided against it. The money in football is much more worrying to me, thank the money of the banks of the world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Impossible The money in banks does not stay in one place, it is used to leverage other deals, buy other banks books and invest I did not hear too many people complaining over the boom years about cheap mortgages, booming housing market and cheap loans, the individuals who over streched themselves should look inward for some of the blame, in fact the story would be far far FAR worse should/ when the interest rate climbs nothing is impossible if there is a will to do it. Perhaps nationalise some banks and not allow them to take stupid risks (regulations) - (they keep our wages / pensions, etc) and let the private banks run their private enterprises. best time for mortgages is now......1.99% APR.....yippie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooquicktostop Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 best time for mortgages is now......1.99% APR.....yippie. Try getting one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martini Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 best time for mortgages is now......1.99% APR.....yippie. Try getting one I bet an investment banker could... oh... wait! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 best time for mortgages is now......1.99% APR.....yippie. Try getting one already have - couldn't be more happier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooquicktostop Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Try getting one already have - couldn't be more happier. You are very welcome, got to love a recession then hey Next Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I had no idea the crisis was going to happen imi. lol On a serious note, its not that none of the bankers knew, its just it was not necessarily in our area or remit to say it. I can't say too much anyway as at work. Imagine you work for Toyota, and see early pics of the LFA - you believe it looks terrible at the back and its a disaster waiting to happen. You work in the service department in a dealership in Surrey. You can call up the head designer at Toyota all you want and tell them you prefer the supra rear lights - you plead with them to change the rear lights. You claim it will cripple Toyota if this car is released with these lights. Do you think they'll listen to a man in the service department of a delearship with no experience in car design? Same thing happens in a bank. I see your point, however you do work for institutions that are rewarded for bringing in massive returns by what it now transpires as unduly risk; to feed their extortionate greed (bankers, shareholders, everyone included). Sooner or later the bubble was going to burst and thats whats happened. It was a false economy built on matchsticks. We have some seriously tough times ahead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Your comments are so refreshing supra aero. Few people seem to have a logical approach to this with most regurgitating whatever banker bashing they've seen most recently in the news. Agreed. Thank you - just trying to make people understand its not as obvious and clean cut as the papers make out. I see your point, however you do work for institutions that are rewarded for bringing in massive returns by what it now transpires as unduly risk; to feed their extortionate greed (bankers, shareholders, everyone included). Sooner or later the bubble was going to burst and thats whats happened. It was a false economy built on matchsticks. Agree in part. I don't know however if you could fairly call them all greedy. Whilst some of the men at the top earn ludicrously high wages. You must bear in mind that most have worked 40+ years of very very long hours to get there. When you get to that level of extortionate greed as you call it, it's no longer Mon-Fri work, with the odd weekend. They are also working around the clock. The CEO does not work "London GMT" hours, but world clock hours. Doing conference calls, creating sales pitches/presentations at any ungodly hour of the day. And bear in mind he/she may have been doing this for 20+ years. Often sleeping 3-4 hours a time. My old manager slept 5 hours a day on weekdays and has done so for past 10 years. He may sleep in Saturdays and that is it. Sundays is a working day preparing for presentations etc. on Monday. I just think if you alot of you guys worked in an investment banking environment in a role to earn these wages you see in the paper and saw what it really is like, your comments would be very different. I am not saying they are not well paid by any means, but I am also saying that I don't think all of them are paid highly enough to call them all greedy. Some are, yes; but you can't bluntly say they all are overpaid. I think you'd be surprised how few bankers make it beyond 25-30 without a career change due to stress/work hours/politics in the work place/poor salary initially. How many cabbies/teachers/lecturers in and outside London have you met who said "I used to work for so and so bank". There is a reason despite the high wages so many quit. I too have thought of quitting this industry many times. Most bankers have no social life on weekdays except Friday - alot have "housewives" and kids they never see until they get home to tuck them into bed. They are off to work by 5-6am so don't see them in the morning. Most top bankers don't take all their holiday allocation - most top U.S. banks only give 20 days holiday a year. So they use maybe 10-14 days a year? Bearing in mind their 80 hour work weeks. To be rewarded with a bonus at the end of the year for giving up your life... I am not 100% certain I'd call them greedy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hogmaw Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Fook that. I'd rather work for a pittance and spend my time LIVING. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terminator Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I read somewhere that the figure for bonuses quoted in some papers was a figure arrived at by assuming, UK bankers would follow, the yet to be proved speculation, about US banker bonuses. So probably a crock of shite. I gave up on news papers years ago, only good for one thing. My old gran had the right idea, she did not read news papers either, but used the neighbours papers to cut in to smaller sheets and hang in the toilet at the end of the garden. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 We are in a capitalist society, and what you are suggesting is almost communist. I'm not suggesting anything really just trying to show you how people outside of banking can perceive the situation........ Bankers (rightly or wrongly) are being blamed for the global economic downturn....................downturn has resulted in lots business collapses and salary freezes and at the very least widespread concern for everyone and their job security........meanwhile those getting the blame (again rightly or wrongly) claim they are just hard working joes (aren't we all?) and don't deserve pay cuts or freezes. Managing directors of companies up and down the country are feeling the pinch and have to make decisions on staffing and pay and their employees (in these sort of times) have to generally accept them and adjust their lifestyle accordingly. The perception (and reality?) is that the banking sector directors being faced with this possible dilema had a fairy godmother/genie in a lamp to make their problems go away, no? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 I'm not suggesting anything really just trying to show you how people outside of banking can perceive the situation........ Bankers (rightly or wrongly) are being blamed for the global economic downturn....................downturn has resulted in lots business collapses and salary freezes and at the very least widespread concern for everyone and their job security........meanwhile those getting the blame (again rightly or wrongly) claim they are just hard working joes (aren't we all?) and don't deserve pay cuts or freezes. Managing directors of companies up and down the country are feeling the pinch and have to make decisions on staffing and pay and their employees (in these sort of times) have to generally accept them and adjust their lifestyle accordingly. The perception (and reality?) is that the banking sector directors being faced with this possible dilema had a fairy godmother/genie in a lamp to make their problems go away, no? Fair enough. I am not dismissing your comments just giving my side. Ultimately I believe you are right and yes it is unfair I won't deny that the banking sector got bailed out when others were left to go. Just unfortunate/fortune depending on what side of the coin you are on, that banking is such a backbone of the service/financial industry. There were definitely a few banks I'd have liked to see go don't get me wrong. Just I wanted to let some people on here understand (not implying yourself just people in general) what is involved in working within the sector which allows for these high wages, and educate a few people about the misconception that all bankers caused the crisis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imi Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Thank you - just trying to make people understand its not as obvious and clean cut as the papers make out. Agree in part. I don't know however if you could fairly call them all greedy. Whilst some of the men at the top earn ludicrously high wages. You must bear in mind that most have worked 40+ years of very very long hours to get there. When you get to that level of extortionate greed as you call it, it's no longer Mon-Fri work, with the odd weekend. They are also working around the clock. The CEO does not work "London GMT" hours, but world clock hours. Doing conference calls, creating sales pitches/presentations at any ungodly hour of the day. And bear in mind he/she may have been doing this for 20+ years. Often sleeping 3-4 hours a time. My old manager slept 5 hours a day on weekdays and has done so for past 10 years. He may sleep in Saturdays and that is it. Sundays is a working day preparing for presentations etc. on Monday. I just think if you alot of you guys worked in an investment banking environment in a role to earn these wages you see in the paper and saw what it really is like, your comments would be very different. I am not saying they are not well paid by any means, but I am also saying that I don't think all of them are paid highly enough to call them all greedy. Some are, yes; but you can't bluntly say they all are overpaid. I think you'd be surprised how few bankers make it beyond 25-30 without a career change due to stress/work hours/politics in the work place/poor salary initially. How many cabbies/teachers/lecturers in and outside London have you met who said "I used to work for so and so bank". There is a reason despite the high wages so many quit. I too have thought of quitting this industry many times. Most bankers have no social life on weekdays except Friday - alot have "housewives" and kids they never see until they get home to tuck them into bed. They are off to work by 5-6am so don't see them in the morning. Most top bankers don't take all their holiday allocation - most top U.S. banks only give 20 days holiday a year. So they use maybe 10-14 days a year? Bearing in mind their 80 hour work weeks. To be rewarded with a bonus at the end of the year for giving up your life... I am not 100% certain I'd call them greedy. Ehhh...? I am not questioning how hard of some of these individuals work. I completely agree that people need to be rewarded for talent and for hard work. Think you need to read my last post again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supra_aero Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Sorry my post was focusing on your extortionate greed part - my response was justifying these high salaries (in your words -extortionate greed). Too tired to comment on rest. Can do so tomorrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted October 22, 2009 Share Posted October 22, 2009 Ultimately I believe you are right .... that'll do for me seriously I don't have an issue with banks/bankers per se, there just seems to have been a switch in simple terms from bankers being very tight (bean counter accountant types) with credit when our parents were our age compared to the last 10+ yrs where credit has been thrust upon/sold to us (effectively Sales persons). The banks lending often at many multiples of the deposits they had, some interesting 'financial instruments' that few seem to understand and this going unchecked by regulators/Governments has caused the whole system to come a cropper........from what I can make out at least? Anyhow I can't talk too much as where I am currently working, whilst not strictly Public service, is heavily subsidised by it............so I'm probably 2nd in line for a shoeing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseys Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 imho being a person who works for one of the top investment banks that the media portrayal of bonuses is complete s***. The paper figures are either violently skewed or misrepresented in some way. You have to remember that in an investment bank the percentage of people on trading floors, doing big deals are not the majority of employees in an investment bank. So let's say 5% of total staff are people actually doing investment/brokerage? And I think I'm being generous there. Working for one of the top three at the moment and having figures banded about of an average bonus of £50,000 from say a £xxx million bonus pot, or even a £yyy million salary + bonus pot could potentially be true, but the figures for distribution could be inaccurate. If you look at a big investment bank you will have : Traders/Brokers - 5% of staff Management - 7.5% of staff Retail staff (people in bank branches) 35% Back office staff - 15% - administrative people, helpdesks etc IT Production staff - 15% IT Application development staff - 10% Infrastructure staff (bulidings/utilities/networking/power etc) - 5% Other - 5% If you look at a big bank it'll have presence in 100+ countries, primarily in US, UK, Europe, Middle East and Asia/Pacific regions. So let's say you have circa 100,000 employees. Yes if you took the bonus pot and distributed it amongst 5,000 (the investor/brokerage staff) it'd probably look like a high figure. If you then distributed it across 90,000 (10,000 staff 'underperforming' getting no bonus) then I think it will even out a little. Yes there is weighting, yes base salary/commission/position is taken into account. If you look at another business, say a car dealership and your 5sales rep team are responsible for 75%+ of your entire income/profit wouldn't you pay them (or want pay if you were one of those) reflecting that? Without that set of employees suddenly your company is earning 75% less. If another car dealership was offering slightly more money they'd shuffle off there surely, so it's a case of competitive compensation *if it makes it viable to the net income of the firm*. If you don't pay a reasonable amount for someone who can make you a larger profit, someone else will. It's the nature of any business, not just banking/financial. If you spent your entire year working 60-80 hour weeks and could show to your company that through that work you've earned them say £50,000,000 profit, wouldn't you be a bit miffed if you just got say £25,000 a year? I'd agree, no bonus if you don't make the company money, or don't meet an aggressive target, but if you are making money for a company you are an important asset. Not all of us in a financial institute are making the company money (admin staff, IT staff, cooks, cleaners, security etc) we are overhead or supply the tools to make the money, we can only save costs which in general is small compared to money trading can make/lose. Work well at any job and normally you'll be rewarded in comparison to what the company earns and your contribution to that earning. Trust me, having worked for a few financial institutions the bonus schemes I think are not accurately portrayed by the media. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_b Posted October 23, 2009 Share Posted October 23, 2009 Some good points caseys. I've often suspected that these average figures are heavily skewed by a small number of very high earners in any given bank. The median figure would be more revealing but it wouldn't change the reasoning behind (or the need for) bonuses. It's supply and demand in a competitive marketplace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.